Earlier I had proposed a system to vote on the language used in pending bills in congress. In my opinion voting on pre-proposal / bill-ideas is not getting the job done - thus, I think we should be using wisdom of the crowds on exact bill language.

Could be perceived complexity; or the nature of being a bit out of context to the necessary boots-on-the-ground issues that surround OWS tech.

Not sure your thoughts, but thought I'd ping you directly (Greg)

Personally I find it a bit ironic that pending law, down to the sentence level is not being polled. Seems everyone's dancing round what should be proposed (into law), meanwhile law language people disagree with is being written every day with effectively no force being applied during the critical pending - till - vote time-window.

I would like to join this working group, and I plan to attend the working group session tomorrow afternoon. I have a couple ideas (the first leading into the second) about how to use the internet to develop
government policy/program proposals.

Idea #1: Twitter-style policy/program proposals are published
and rated by the audience (at least thumbs up / thumbs down). Could look
like http://www.quirky.com/participate, with additional information and comments about each idea available with a clickthrough.

Idea #2: Develop and organize policies/programs through a wiki. We'd
want to propel nuanced schools of thought about each issue, so it
wouldn't be like wikipedia where there's just one page for each topic -
we'd allow discrete policy/program versions as requested by
contributors/managers. Each policy/program would have a self-selected
community around it, and there could be the current proposal,
implementation plans, public comments / discussion board, proposed
edits, etc. To help the cream rise to the top, we could evaluate with:
(1) crowdsourced ratings, (2) standardized analysis like cost-benefit,
(3) recommendations of review board. The website should be designed to
be optimal for contributors (e.g., collaborative technology, rights
management, etc.) and visitors (e.g., organized and subcategorized and
ranked so that all the good stuff is easy to find).

These ideas could be important steps toward direct democracy and away
from special interests and two-party politics. What do you think?